How inter-faith dialog can promote a plural society

Th. Sumartana, Institute for Inter-Faith, Dialog in Indonesia, Yogyakarta

Since its establishment in 1999, the Institute for Inter-Faith Dialog in Indonesia (Interfidei) has been fully engaged in popularizing inter-faith dialog, particularly during the unstable late 1990s.

Because of its nature, Interfidei has greater freedom to develop its vision and mission.

In January, Interfidei organized a seminar and workshop in Malino, South Sulawesi, attended by some 80 people from about 56 inter-faith institutions. The crucial question was, what can religions do to adequately respond to social pluralism, particularly when it is accompanied by violence?

Pluralism may be a blessing when it can be positively accepted, but it can turn into a curse when rejected and negatively responded to. Clashes in Java, Papua, Aceh, East Timor, Maluku, West, Central Kalimantan and Poso, Central Sulawesi, have proved our inability to change our attitudes and manage our pluralism. The community is pluralistic and dynamic, but we continue to apply a standard, as if we live in a homogeneous and static community.

Our "multi-dimensional crisis" is a situation in which the entire community finds it difficult to survive. We are going through economic, cultural, political, security, religious and other crises. These crises do not befall religions individually but all at the same time. Today, religions are bound and united but are also subjected to a common crisis.

In the 1930s, the world was swept by an economic crisis of an unusually great magnitude. This recession destroyed the pillars of international life, paralyzing international relations. International political and ideological relations led to confusion, prompted by racism, fascism, authoritarianism and totalitarianism. A world war became inevitable.

Afterwards, there was a common desire to rearrange a common life in a new manner. The United Nations was set up and the Human Rights Declaration was issued. New international religious institutions came into being, focusing themselves on efforts to establish inter-religious communication, peace and cooperation.

We are in a similar condition today. In the face of the crises, there is a tendency toward communalism, partisanship, tribalism, exclusivity, sectarianism and even fascism.

The crisis has paralyzed all social institutions. Violence, prejudice and animosity are widespread. The community has lost its flexibility and disintegrated as there are no longer cohesive elements. There is not a single sociopolitical institution capable of providing reconciliation.

Religious institutions also tend to be isolated and remain bureaucratic, dogmatic, exclusive and dysfunctional. They are plagued by fragmentation. Religions are the storehouses of social enigmas and contain paradoxes and ambivalences. Yet there is strong competition to recruit, due to political partisan disputes.

There is no longer freedom to express differences of opinion. Our community has lost its ability to anticipate and manage conflict. There is no awareness of the need to cooperate. Worse still, religions have often played their part in aggravating the situation.

It is now time to bring together our more promising common ideas on vision, mission and values. Our problem now is how to place the relationship of these two poles in a perspective that promises hope. All this turmoil has come about because we have interpreted pluralism negatively and perceived it as a destructive force.

For a long time, religions have not done their job properly. However, there are still reasons why we must continue to support them. We must draw up a new map of how different religions fare in our country, carefully taking into account the state of inter- religious communities. They are the seeds of reform.

First, religions are the oldest institutions in our society and also the most pluralized. These institutions contain a potential balance of destructive and constructive forces.

Second, religions are popular here. Religions exist as a way to receive "blessings for all creatures" and all religions gain a moral legitimacy in their respective communities.

Third, religions have undergone a revival and have given rise to inter-faith communities.

It is these inter-faith communities that serve as an arena where religions "vie with one another to be virtuous". The morality of a religion is rooted in an awareness of responsibility. Hope lies in this awareness of responsibility and orientation to the future (eschatology). It is this moral value that we need to confront an immoral society, one which fears change.

Why do we continue to pin hopes on an inter-religious community? First, such a community is trained in holding dialog and therefore respects differences in opinion. Second, a religious path encourages people to compete in being virtuous.

Third, it is a non-governmental organization, which involves the grass roots. Fourth, an inter-faith community is oriented to the future.

The intrinsic nature of the morality of every religion is to aim to improve society. A religion may become an embryo for a civil society underlined by emancipation, democracy, human rights, gender equality and so forth.

Fifth, an inter-faith community is not inimical to formal religions and has no pretensions to replace a religion, but serves instead as a force for social reform, which includes the reform of religious people within their internal circles.

The institutions for inter-religious dialog have become an embryo for the emergence of a civil society in Indonesia.

Inter-religious dialog will at least be able to solve some of the country's problems. We face relentless challenges to reform our society. It is in this transition that efforts must continuously be made to translate our hope into reality.

The above is a condensed version of the writer's presentation at the seminar on "Living in a Pluralistic Society," held last month by Muhammadiyah Youth and the British Council in Jakarta.